Test Drive Shootout: BMW E90 M3 vs Cadillac CTS-V Coupe

"NervesOfThrill" (adrenalingus) 10/21/2014 at 22:31 • Filed to: None

3

13

After getting an amazing amount of help today through suggestions from my fellow Oppos in thinking of possible cars that could be my next "one car to rule them all" and tackle being a DD, AutoX, track day and road trip steed I decided to go commence the test driving.

Today's nominees were a 2009 E90 M3 Sedan and a 2011 Cadillac CTS-V Coupe. I'll cut to the chase and say this was a helluva satisfying start.

EXTERIOR

Winner: I have to give the M3 a slight edge here.

I love that Cadillac stepped WAY outside of the box on the Coupe and made it completely unique from the Sedan and a car that looks like nothing else on the road plus giving it a look that seems far closer to a concept car than most production cars can ever dream of being. But the M3 has some of the best curves ever found on a Beemer and that just suit my eye to a tee.

INTERIOR

Winner: CTS-V, by a mile.

I'll just lay it out there; BMW interiors have never gotten me excited. I am not pragmatic and therefore probably not the audience the Germans had in mind when rolling out one more in a long line of austere inter............. sorry fell asleep thinking about the interior. I also wasn't a fan of how counter-intuitive the placement and usage of some of the controls were, but I am sure it is a fast learning curve. I did think the new iDrive system was light years better than the old one and the GPS/audio unit was good.

The Cadillac interior was just more luxurious and modern. It was instantly usable on all fronts/features, had a great GPS and incredible audio all in a better looking package. It just looked better and felt better from center console to seats to steering wheel. I'd be remiss if I didn't mention the seats directly, they are just about perfect and when combined Magnetic Ride Control are a dream.

POWERTRAIN

Winner: Tie

No losers here, just two polar opposite tour de force winners. This all comes down to preference. The BMW's high revving, orgasmic sounding V8 was an absolute blast to drive and left you looking for every opportunity to wind it out or sit in the high rpm's and bask in them. The CTS-V has smuggled a tank engine under the hood. OH MY GOD THE TORQUE. The sheer amount of usable power flowing to your right foot is addictive in the best of ways.

You punch the BMW and you feel things start to happen predictably, smooth and fast and you picture yourself at Monaco drinking milk on a winner's podium. You punch the CTS-V and your spine turns to mashed potatoes, everything around turns blurry and you fade into a dream of charging headfirst into the Persian army wearing a gladiator costume and an ear consumingly wide smile. The CTS-V comes for scalps with a broadsword and wears steel toed boots to bed, just in case things get rowdy at night.

When it comes to the transmissions it is more of the same. The Caddy is much smoother in automatic mode but cannot touch the instantaneous response of the DCT in the BMW. They are worlds apart, but both very suited to their powerplants. I would actually love to know how the CTS-V would perform with a DCT or PDK.

HANDLING

Winner: Cadillac CTS-V takes it by a nose.

This was the upset I didn't see coming. In my 25 minute test drive of each car on identical circuits through highway, back road and city street I just kept smiling in both cars. Both are incredible, but the Caddy had the most range. In Touring mode it was like being in a pure luxury tourer and in sport mode it hid every ounce of that cars weight and was down for anything. I've always held BMW's as the benchmark for steering feedback in their class but the Caddy nipped it in this comparison and I found no area of handling I didn't prefer the CTS-V. I'd say that my experience may be different on a track, but the Nürburgring lap times say different so I've got to go off of what I could muster in city limits while keeping a license.

SUMMARY

I went to that dealer wholly and solely to drive the E90 M3. I only ended up driving the Caddy after being prodded into doing so by the saleswoman. I can't say exactly when I ended up liking the Caddy better. It could have been when I first crawled into the interior that suited me far better, or when I did my first drop-gear pass and heard the tires chirp at 50mph, or when the saleswoman suggested I do a standing start full launch and my eyes touched the back of my cranium and then pancaked there until my adrenal gland gave way to my bladder and pulled my right foot off the launch pad they call a gas pedal; but I did end up liking it better.

I definitely enjoyed revving the BMW more than running out of RPM's and hitting the rev-limiter so darn fast in the CTS-V and I definitely liked the exhaust note and paddle shifting the BMW better. But at the end of the day, to me (necessary disclaimer to not insult anyone or their car because beauty is always in the eye of the beholder which is why they make so damn many types of them), the interior of the BMW for a car that price was a total showstopper before I ever climbed in the CTS-V to begin with. The fact that I then enjoyed the CTS-V so much and am still smiling from the acceleration just sealed the deal.

Now on to the next cars!

GeorgeyBoy > NervesOfThrill 10/21/2014 at 22:52

1

CTS looks straight sinister.

davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com > NervesOfThrill 10/21/2014 at 23:27

1

Nice write-up. You really can't go wrong with either (is it a great time to be a car guy, or what?). The CTS-V is an impressive machine. I'd have to have the wagon if I went that way... I've had a short test drive in the sedan, and the power is just nuts. 4,255 lbs is some serious mass to be slinging around on track, much less on an AutoX course, so that's something to keep in mind. The E9x M3 is no featherweight either, but the more weight, the quicker you'll use up consumables.

What's next on the list?

Crest > NervesOfThrill 10/21/2014 at 23:42

1

All your points resonate with me. I've always disliked BMW interiors. I mean what's with the bland black acres of dashboard and mono colored red gauges like a 1970's cell phone? And people call that quality because it's soft touch? They need to seat in a Lexus or an Audi.

Now to the engines tho, that NA V8 in the BMW is the way the truth and the light. But as you said, Cadillac didn't just come to play. They came to kick ass. I'd most definitely end up with the Caddy as u did simply because Batmobile, and that car taught the automotive world that insanity is okay.

NervesOfThrill > Crest 10/22/2014 at 00:22

0

Batmobile is what my wife said when she first saw the CTS-V coupe too! I'm not seeing many in my price range though, so it may be an all too short love affair.

NervesOfThrill > davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com 10/22/2014 at 00:37

1

I have the exact same concerns and the M3 in sedan form felt a little bigger than what I am looking for next in addition to them both being a little heftier than the cars I started out ogling.

Next up is probably the other end of the spectrum so I can make a final go/no-go on that side of the coin and start whittling down the list: Cayman S or newer base Cayman with PDK (and I'll be bringing 2 sets of golf clubs with me to make damn sure it will work for me). A BMW Z4 M Coupe if one happens to pop up to check out, or a Z4 Coupe as a surrogate since I'm mostly checking out the cargo room. I might also go against every fiber in my body and maybe, possibly try a Lexus IS-F. Last, a Corvette. It is the darkest of dark horses because as you can see above when I am paying this much for a car I expect a certain level of quality and luxury and the interior in pre-C7 Corvettes has always kept me away. But what the hell.

BKRM3 > NervesOfThrill 10/22/2014 at 10:39

2

Interesting to see what you took away from driving them both. The low end torque makes the Caddy an easier car to drive on the street, that's for sure, but I think it's objectively not the better track car, so it really depends how much you want to do that. The CTS-V weighs SO much. Observation: I've done 18 track days and have been out there with about every variety of Mustang, GT500s, Camaros, tons of Merc AMGs, M5s and a bunch of other highway bruisers that aren't really track cars (incl. a 750Li - no joke!). They do great for the occasional HPDE, but they're not "made" for tracking. You know what I've never seen on track? A CTS-V (except the PWC race car which is awesome!).

Now, as you said, you didn't get to try these cars out anywhere other than public roads so you couldn't possibly have felt the real handling characteristics of either at the limit. It's a shame they don't let you do that sort of thing before making a purchase =) Also let me confirm what you already know: neither of these cars excel at autocross for obvious reasons. I've done it with my E90 and it's like fishing with dynamite: effective, but not graceful.

As you already said, these cars were purpose built to accomplish very different goals, and if you're comparing them both you have to set your expectations accordingly, despite the fact that the M has a V8. I think you gathered that the whole point of the M3 is having chassis dynamics that match or outperform the engine. It's supposed to be equal parts car and motor. The CTS-V is the opposite, and so is the new M3/4. That's what people want now, apparently. The M3 used to be (and up through the E9X generation was) a car for people who literally did not care about racing Corvettes between stop lights. When max HP is at 8,300rpm you're not winning drag races lol.

Your comments about the interior I don't really understand. I think it's entirely personal preference. Was the M3's interior black? I could see that coming off as "boring" in an M car because you expect a bit more. Personally, I'm not a fan of chrome clocks and gloss plastic, so my preference would be decidedly in favor of the BMW, particularly (as my car is) optioned with Fox Red leather. Here are both interiors for the sake of comparison:

Can't wait to hear about what you drive next!

NervesOfThrill > BKRM3 10/22/2014 at 11:16

1

I agree with most everything you say above and if I lived say, less than an hour from a track, then my priorities would probably be different since I could log more days there. But instead Tampa seems to be the only major city in FL that is 2 hours to the nearest track (it is Sebring though, so not a bad one to be closest to) and then at least 3 hours to all of the rest of them. So that leaves me with the occasional AutoX where Focus ST's and Cooper S's dominate and you get your thrills in 45 second doses. Which is just a Band-Aid for the kind of driving I really want to do and enjoy the most. So that leaves me with mostly daily driving and deserted back road drives when behind the wheel. In that world the CTS-V seemed to be the most fun and livable.

In terms of the interiors; the BMW was trimmed in light gray/black interior on blue exterior, which is one of my favorite combos and the CTS-V was silver with a black/tan interior. For me the rubber (non-glare I suppose) coated BMW interior is just way too Spartan. It feels like BMW is clinging to this approach to please loyalists despite nearly every review I read commenting negatively on the interior design. I get the whole German design intent, but Audi interiors pull off pragmatism while still being elegant and visually interesting, whereas the BMW interior just feels plain and visually boring to me. Back when M cars were balanced, light and leading with a mindset of less is more to accomplish their mission it was more understandable. But in this day and age of GPS, power seats, iDrive and the like it just feels woefully inadequate compared to any of their competitors more from a visual perspective than from a functional deficit.

I suppose some people prefer functional/minimalist and some people prefer a more arty aesthetic in their design. I am in the camp that prefers the more elegant design queues and love the interiors found in Audis, Jaguars and the Cadillac in cars like these that straddle luxury/performance.

Please note; in a separate review of the more performance minded segment when I compared the Cayman S to the BMW Z4M I much preferred the Z4M interior in that review. BMW did minimal/functional far better than Porsche did in that segment.

http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/test-drive-200…

BKRM3 > NervesOfThrill 10/22/2014 at 11:52

1

Ugh. 2 hours to Sebring isn't the worst but it's not ideal. I'm lucky enough to be 50 miles from New Jersey Motorsports Park, which has two great tracks and I'm within a 2-3 hour drive of quite a few other really remarkable tracks. I did 12 track days this summer, which was incredible but pretty ambitious in terms of both cost and time. I think I'll dial it back a little next year...either that or give in and buy a race car. Haven't decided yet =)

The Z4M has a great interior, and it fits that car. The M3 is just a tarted up 3 series, after all, so while it isn't exactly no-frills it certainly doesn't try to wow the driver. I think minimalist is the right word for sure. A big, flat dash is very German (until recently), and seems familiar in everything from the Jetta to the Porsche 997.

I'd be interested to know what you think about the more stylized BMW interiors, like in the new 6 series or even the new 4 series. It's a pretty big departure from the E60 and E9X approach.

I also appreciate a nicely done luxury interior, and Jaguar is the brand that comes to mind there (or, good lord, something like Bentley or Rolls). I dunno, there's something that seems contrived when certain brands attempt to duplicate that sort of quality and feel. Cadillac is one that I don't find entirely convincing, and Infiniti is another.

This all reminds me...I REALLY need to get behind the wheel of a Cayman S. Seems like everyone I know is talking about that car at the moment for some reason.

NervesOfThrill > BKRM3 10/22/2014 at 12:23

1

The Cayman S was a really unique experience for me. It had almost no wow factor in terms of hp/torque and was not that exciting in town. But when I got on some side roads it made 45mph feel really exciting with a lively driving experience.

The Cayman S also seemed to toe the line between daily livability and performance nearly perfectly compared to the Z4M which was a purist car to me. The Cayman felt roomier than it is, was extremely comfortable and had great road manners. Then when you pick up the pace it had lightning fast reflexes and was just, well, fun! The best analogy I can think of is a go-kart in a tuxedo.

Definitely go drive one. Not the car for everyone with the low'ish power figures but definitely a smile inducer.

BKRM3 > NervesOfThrill 10/22/2014 at 13:07

1

Go-kart in a tuxedo! I love that! =)

davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com > BKRM3 10/22/2014 at 17:05

2

The one time I saw a CTS-V at the track, it ended up having a slow-speed off right in front of everyone watching, and then left early because he'd completely decimated his brake pads. Can do a hell of a hot lap, I'm sure, but not the best for a full day at the track (and frequent return trips).

davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com > NervesOfThrill 10/22/2014 at 17:31

1

I really need to get a drive in a Cayman on some curvy back roads. The one time I was out in one was just around town and on the highway. While fun, I surely didn't get a feel for what that car is really exceptional at.

davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com > Crest 10/22/2014 at 17:32

0

that NA V8 in the BMW is the way the truth and the light

This.